This is my first post having browsed this forum for some time now. I very much look forward to taking part in the discussions on here!

I have seen AUJ three times and enjoyed it more with each viewing. One issue that bothered me slightly was the fact that Rivendell appears to be completely different than when we first saw it in FOTR. I'm not referring to differences in the technology used to represent Rivendell (i.e. CGI instead of models), or the overall architectural style (which is consistent across the films). However, the physical layout of the buildings in Rivendell appear to be quite different.

I've included two pictures for comparison. Did anybody else notice this? I wonder why the filmmakers chose to depart from the established geography of Rivendell.

Perhaps I'm over-analysing the issue, but given the effort that went into maintaining continuity elsewhere in the film, I found this to be a little odd!

I noticed this as well and have tried to figure out how the two layouts could have been reconciled. PJ and co said we would see Rivendell from a different entrance and areas we have not seen. This implies that both layouts are part of the same larger blueprint. I cannot see it but maybe it true if anyone has any ideas. Another likely possibility PJ and co decided to abandon the first idea and just create Rivendell from scratch. I read somewhere a poster said that the place where the Elves and Elrond host the banquet is the same chamber where the Council of Elrond occurs in FOTR. Truth be told I prefer the newer layout which seems more realistic given the expanse of the valley.

I don't understand how creating a new environment and art design for an existing set piece is lazy. Perhaps PJ realized going back to see the exact same area of Rivendell would be ill received since even familiar characters are chastised for being redundant and boring. Imagine how the critics would have reacted. No I think reusing exact rooms and costumes would seem far lazier at least in the meaning of the term. Also this is a serious discussion unlike seeing an imaginary mountain from an imaginary non descript location like the carrocks. That is pretty silly and doesnt deserve much response.

It seems if they were lazy there would be no change whatsoever. Note also that the pictures used for comparison aren't of the same shot (i.e. one has the bridge in it). I've seen plenty of serious discussion of flaws in the movie - which is probably why it's good to throw in a little humor every now and then.

The movies had the same creative designers: John Howe and Alan Lee. If the same shot (which would be nice for a truer comparison) really looks completely different, it would be a great question for them! Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.

"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower

"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase

Without redesigning the city. It's not like we saw all of Rivendell in LOTR, there are PLENTY of places for them to go in the city for it to feel new.

The shot of the whole city though from afar...the buildings should have remained in relatively the same place. I can understand a building or two being replaced, but this is a complete city redesign. It seems they didn't want to map the model, and decided to build their own city for fun.

Mapping a model and making sure it's the exact same as before from different angles is harder than just making a new one with similar style.

The old Rivendell from a different angle would have had the same effect AND would have been accurate to the film it's supposed to link to. Now it's a silly continuity error that could have been easily avoided.

to be able to excavate Rivendell sometime in the future and note the changes. "Look here, this appears to be Late Second Age ornamentation, with some replacement early in the Third Age". "These archways scream First Age influence!" "Here now, watch where you put that trowel! You'll crumble the masonry!"

An Archaeologist in Middle-earth. Sigh... " Well well!", said a voice. "Just look! Bilbo the hobbit on a pony, my dear! Isn't it delicious!" "Most astonishing wonderful!"

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.

I'm pretty sure this is the same angle, as it's got the bridge and the front entrance. But even it looks different from your first image. I recall reading from someone in the production that Rivendell never had a definite layout even in the LOTR trilogy. Aiya Eärendil Elenion Ancalima! Hail Eärendil, brightest of stars!

Thanks! So that means the difference was there even in LOTR
[In reply to]

Can't Post

So much for beating up the poor Hobbit movie exclusively for it.

It really would be an interesting questions for the set designers, the matte painters and the film editors. Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.

"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower

"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase

Perhaps I'm over-analysing the issue, but given the effort that went into maintaining continuity elsewhere in the film, I found this to be a little odd!

As I recall, the Company approached Rivendell from an almost completely opposite direction than the Fellowship, most likely because Thorin insisted to go around the place. We see familiar buildings from a new perspective, as well as new buildings that were hidden the last time around.

But I was never blaming The Hobbit for it, it's not like it mattered in the grand scheme of things. I just feel the people in charge of set design should care about accuracy a little more.

Tolkien cared a great deal about building this universe with accuracy, and I expect the staff working on the films to do the same. Would it have been so hard to map out Rivendell and then stick with the design, for better or worse?

I think it's actually pretty annoying that they didn't pick a design and stick to it. I don't ever think about it when I'm watching the films, but it's frustrating when I think about it afterward. Aiya Eärendil Elenion Ancalima! Hail Eärendil, brightest of stars!